Re: Peak performance poll
 

whoever said 30+ is full of crap

Re: Peak performance poll
 

In fact, I can play winning Omaha 8, watch baseball and keep a scorecard, read a book, write a love letter, listen to music, evaluate indefinite integrals, and compose villainous screeds in my head for latter posting on 2+2, all at the same time.

Finally, a cogent explanation of your posting policy. If you are composing posts during an O8 game, with all its miraculous-suckouts and bad beats, your unflagging good cheer and polyanna-ish optimism for the human condition are easily understood.

Ex-PFC Wintergreen [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: Peak performance poll
 

[ QUOTE ]
whoever said 30+ is full of crap

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed.

Re: Peak performance poll
 

[ QUOTE ]
This shows a misunderstanding in what playing at peak performance means. Playing at peak performance, isn't just playing at a high level, or playing winning poker. When someone asks how long can you play at peak performance, they are asking you how long can you maintain playing at your absolute best (the peak of your ability). While I believe many of us can still play at a high level or at least play winning poker 8 hours into a session, at this point you will not be playing at 100% of your ability. It may only be a slight decline, but thats still a decline.

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps you're right. But I feel that sometimes, after an hour or two, I am able to hit a comfort zone, a groove, where I feel that I am playing my very best. And I can often maintain this for an extended period.

All-time high
 

In Blackjack, a card counter (straight up) is below his all time high approximately 98% of the time. This means that 98% of the time, that player can moan and groan about how he "useta have more".

I don't know the respective percentage for Poker.

Does anyone?

Re: Peak performance poll
 

I agree with much of what everyone else is saying about PEAK performance, but I dont think very many people play this way for more than three hours at a time. When I was putting in 40+ hours at foxwoods, I would treat it like a job with a couple of 30 minute- 45 minutes, to refresh myself. This is pretty much peak time for me, I would find it hard to make much more than rent money only playing for 4 or five hours a day unless your playing is some really soft games.

Re: Peak performance poll
 

[ QUOTE ]
On the other hand, playing low-limit Omaha 8 is a snap. In fact, I can play winning Omaha 8, watch baseball and keep a scorecard, read a book, write a love letter, listen to music, evaluate indefinite integrals, and compose villainous screeds in my head for latter posting on 2+2, all at the same time.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was thinking about this a little more last night. I sat down at a very good low-limit O8 game, won the first hand, and then started folding. Once every round or two I would get a playable hand, which would immediately be pronounced dead on the flop. Since I've been thinking about the life-span of mental acuity lately, I was paying attention to how my brain was functioning. After a couple of hours of routine folds, I noticed that my attention was definitely slipping, and after two and a half hours I was pretty much in a coma. I was forced to get up.

But then I started thinking. What if I had a ballgame & scorecard (a perfect activity for this O8 game), some calculable calculus, love letters or villanous screeds to work on? Not only would the structure and composition of the game allow me to work on such projects, but the converse would be true: the performance of these activities would (by keeping my mind active) allow me to continue playing the game.

When I posted the question about maintaining peak performance, I envisioned situations where continuous mental activity would tire the mind. But how many poker sessions are like this? Maybe, as in other things, it is inactivity that causes fatigue. I wonder if a regimen of mental activity conducted at the poker table could prolong peak mental performance.

Re: Peak performance poll
 

i have always found that i am at my best,thinking wise anyway, shortly after waking up from a full nights sleep. so i tend to play around that time. once i saw a study that confirmed this.
then i quit when i feel i am getting tired or losing interest. sometimes leaving and walking around or whatever may prolong it a bit. but if you are playing against competition, you are better off quitting and resting and coming back fresh than playing tired for long hours.
8 hours is my limit. over many years of playing, and many times i played long sessions of 16 hours or more, i have found the time after about ten or twelve were worthless. and ended up sleeping through the next good game. or not being able to come back fresh and beat the same tired players.

Re: Peak performance poll
 

[ QUOTE ]
But then I started thinking. What if I had a ballgame & scorecard (a perfect activity for this O8 game), some calculable calculus, love letters or villanous screeds to work on? Not only would the structure and composition of the game allow me to work on such projects, but the converse would be true: the performance of these activities would (by keeping my mind active) allow me to continue playing the game.


[/ QUOTE ]

My conclusion also. At least about Omaha 8. The game became more endurable for me. Is it a bad omen for you that you came to a similar conclusion at the proding of Le Misanthrope. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
When I posted the question about maintaining peak performance, I envisioned situations where continuous mental activity would tire the mind. But how many poker sessions are like this? Maybe, as in other things, it is inactivity that causes fatigue. I wonder if a regimen of mental activity conducted at the poker table could prolong peak mental performance.

[/ QUOTE ]

An interesting notion. And perhaps applicable to certain games under certian conditions. But also entirely dependent on the particular individual, in my opinion.

This as certainly been an interesting thread and exchange of ideas.

-Zeno

Re: Peak performance poll
 

After 140 votes (after I voted) the chart is showing a nice distribution patern. except for a big blip for 30+. Obviously they are full of Crap.

Stever
www.TheManWithTheAxe.com